this change. Gold was no longer used for currency, and U.S. Notes constituted almost the entire currency. Almost every state court had upheld the constitutionality of the National Banking Act. Tayloe had left the city before the expiration of the contract, preventing Willard from discussing with him the nature of the "cash" to be used for the down payment. Willard had petitioned the courts in a timely matter, expressing his desire to fulfill the contract in good faith. Since Willard had acted in good faith, the Court concluded, the contract was still in force. The second issue confronting the Court was the effect which inflation had on the sale price of the property. The Court flatly refused to overturn the contract on grounds of equity simply because the assessed value had exceeded the anticipated rate of inflation. The parties had considered the effect inflation might have, and had agreed on the terms. No objection had been raised at any time by either party prior to agreement, and the contract was (as Field previously noted) fair. But the Court also recognized that forcing Tayloe to accept paper currency valued at one-half that of coin would also be unjust. The Court also dispensed with a third issue, which Tayloe had raised. Willard had transferred a half-interest in the deed to the property to his brother. Tayloe argued this rendered the contract void because he had not agreed to make the brother a party to the agreement. But the majority rejected this argument: "[T]hat is a matter with which the defendant has no concern." The majority remanded the case back to the district court with the instruction that Willard make the down payment, subsequent purchase price payments, interest payments, and yearly rent to Tayloe in gold and silver coin. Upon satisfaction of the down payment, Tayloe must convey the deed to Willard. The price of the property, however, was not adjusted. Concurrence Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase and Associate Justice Samuel Nelson concurred in the decision regarding payment in gold and silver coin, but not the reasoning behind the holding. Impact of the case Henry Willard successfully purchased the property from Benjamin Ogle Tayloe, and the Willard Hotel became one of Washington, D.C.'s, landmark hotels. It still exists, although the name has changed to the Willard InterContinental Hotel, and it is one of the city's best-known luxury hotels. Willard v. Tayloe was an